transport_watch

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals two modes (hosted vs non-hosted) and mentions a timeout via wait_seconds, but does not explain blocking behavior, return values, or what 'local-ledger guidance' entails. Partial disclosure but lacks key behavioral details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, lean and to the point. It could be more informative, but it is not verbose or cluttered. Appropriate length for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite high schema coverage and existence of an output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: what does 'returnable status' mean, what does the tool return in non-hosted mode, and how does it interact with sibling tools? The description is too sparse to fully understand usage context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description largely repeats the schema descriptions for run_id and wait_seconds without adding new insight. No additional semantic context beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states it waits for a non-hosted Transport run, and notes a different behavior for hosted mode. It clearly identifies the resource (Transport run) and the action (wait), but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like transport_status or transport_abort.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as transport_status or transport_abort. The description implies it is for non-hosted runs but does not state when not to use it or suggest other tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.